CHALLACON

Within the past month, we have been interviewing applicants for a senior recruiter position. As part of human resources, I have panel interviewed applicants. Earlier this week, we came to a decision. The decision was between two very qualified individuals. Both had great skillsets, interviewed well, and would fit the chemistry of our office. I initially gave my recommendation for one, but changed it after I received something from the other applicant.

For me, it was interesting how the simple act of a “thank you for interviewing me” email from this applicant impacted my decision so strongly. And, as serendipitous as things usually are, I ran across a recent article on this topic by Kumar and Epley (2018) in Psychological Science.

This study was straight-forward enough. In a series of four experiments, individuals sent gratitude letters to recipients; the senders and recipients were subsequently asked to complete surveys about the experience. Of course, not every recipient completed the survey, but enough did to get some clear results.

Kumar and Epley (2018) found people do not truly appreciate the value of gratitude on others. In three of the four experiments, the senders underestimated the recipients’ positive reaction to the gratitude. This undervaluing of the impact appeared to influence whether someone would express gratitude.

These researchers also suggested expressing gratitude in person or verbally made more of an impact than sending a card or letter. The latter appears to people as not being as sincere. It is definitely harder to express gratitude in person to someone, but it is important.

I have a stack of “thank you” cards on my desk. I fill one of these out when someone goes out of their way to help me. I try to take some time periodically to write these notes of gratitude to people. Sometimes I get a response; sometimes I do not. Either way, I feel that this small investment, overall, pays dividends. Given this research, I will try to more explicitly express gratitude in person from here on out.

One of the subs I follow on Reddit had a link to a 2015 study in Evolution and Human Behavior on lumbar curvature. The study results suggested males found females attractive due to their spinal curvature, because it indicated a greater ability to bear children. That’s interesting, eh?

In the past several decades, a new field of research has developed in psychology: Evolutionary psychology. This field focuses on evaluating the evolutionary value of human behavior. For example, obsessive-compulsive hoarding behavior likely is because of our ancestors needing to save food/material for the winter months.

From an evolutionary psychology perspective, mating strategies are usually separated by short- and long-term goals. Long-term mating is generally done for the purposes of choosing a potential mate; whereas, short-term mating is likened to brief sexual encounters (Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Perilloux, Cloud, & Buss, 2012). Buss and Schmitt’s (1993) sexual strategies theory proposed females and males gain different benefits from the different types of mating (e.g., long- vs. short-term).

Instead of devolving into a discussion of mating strategies, I want to point out how this the 2015 study tracks with other research. Males engage in long-term mating strategies focused on reproduction (Strout, Fisher, Kruger, & Steeleworthy, 2010). A female who is more viable—more able to produce children—is considered better than one older. Specifically, Buss (1994) identified several key areas related to reproductive viability. In fact, researchers have found males find youth and fertility-linked traits (e.g., facial symmetry, hip-to-waist ratio, body mass index, etc.) as being desirable.

This also tracks with what we know about historical mating techniques. Our ancestral males typically utilized physical appearance as the primary facet, with social reputation and observable behavior as the two other facets to determine a female’s reproductive success. (Females, on the other hand, focused more on males who were able to protect and provide for them and their offspring.)

Overall, female and male long- and short-term mating strategies are different but follow along a similar focus, at least from the evolutionary perspective. This desire for reproduction often makes men more inclined to engage in multiple short-term mating rituals, contradicting females’ intent to just seek out potential longer-term mates.

So, the next time you think someone is attractive, it might be nice to parse out why that is? Face? Body? Or, some innate evolutionary drive.